Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
This study reports a cross-sectional investigation of the link between community violence exposure and
academic difficulties for 237 urban elementary school children (mean age of 9.5 years). Children
completed a self-report inventory assessing exposure to community violence. Their achievement test
scores and GPAs were obtained from school records, and other aspects of psychosocial adjustment were
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
assessed with a multi-informant approach. Analyses indicated that community violence exposure was
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
associated with poor academic performance. These relations appeared to be mediated by symptoms of
depression and disruptive behavior and remained significant even after the prediction associated with
bullying by peers was controlled.
This study is an investigation of the link between exposure to Less is known regarding the impact of urban violence on chil-
community violence and academic difficulties for children in an dren’s academic functioning. Relations between violence exposure
urban elementary school. Although murder and assault rates in the in the community and children’s self-perceived academic compe-
United States have steadily declined during the last decade (Blum- tence have been examined in a small number of existing studies
stein & Wallman, 2000), many of America’s children continue to (Bowen & Bowen, 1999; Schwab-Stone et al., 1995). In addition,
live in chronically violent neighborhoods. The results of survey Overstreet and Braun (1999) reported preliminary findings on the
research suggest that, by the middle years of childhood, most relation between violence exposure and low GPAs for a sample
inner-city children have had first-hand encounters with shootings, of 45 inner-city youth. However, the availability of research ex-
stabbings, and other serious acts of violence (Bell & Jenkins, 1993; amining associations between community violence exposure and
Fitzpatrick & Boldizar, 1993; Kliewer, Lepore, Oskin, & Johnson, direct assessments of academic functioning remains quite limited.
1998; Martinez & Richters, 1993; Osofsky, Wewers, Hann, & Although it may be too early to draw strong conclusions regard-
Fick, 1993). Empirical investigation of the impact of such expe- ing the community setting, there is evidence linking violence
riences on children’s functioning at school is clearly warranted, exposure in other domains to academic difficulties. For example,
given the pervasive nature of violence in some urban children tend to exhibit declines in academic functioning following
neighborhoods. exposure to maltreatment, marital conflict, or other forms of do-
There is growing evidence that community violence exposure mestic violence (for a review, see Margolin & Gordis, 2000).
exerts a pernicious influence on children’s psychosocial adjust- Experiences with physical or verbal victimization by peers can
ment (Garbarino, Dubrow, Kostelny, & Pardo, 1992; Osofsky, also be predictive of poor performance in school (Juvonen,
1995). Researchers have described moderate associations between Nishina, & Graham, 2000). Generalizations from research on
children’s self-reports of exposure to community violence and violence in the home and in peer groups should be made with great
symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (American Psychiatric care, but these findings do highlight the need for further
Association, 1994), anxiety, and depression (Kliewer et al., 1998; investigation.
Martinez & Richters, 1993; Overstreet & Braun, 2000). Children In the present study, we sought to build on past work by
who have been exposed to neighborhood violence may also be at investigating the link between community violence exposure and
risk for disruptive behavior problems in the classroom (Gorman- academic failure for elementary school children. Our objective was
Smith & Tolan, 1998) and concomitant social difficulties with to examine relations between community violence exposure and
school peers (Schwartz & Proctor, 2000). academic difficulties, as indexed with objective indicators of ac-
ademic functioning obtained from review of children’s school
records (i.e., classroom grades, achievement test scores). To the
David Schwartz, Department of Psychology, University of Southern best of our knowledge, analyses of this nature have not been
California; Andrea Hopmeyer Gorman, Department of Psychology, Occi- presented in any existing report.
dental College. As a complement to our focus on the direct link between
This research was supported by an Early Faculty Award from the community violence exposure and academic difficulties, we also
University of Southern California’s Zumberge Fund and a faculty fellow-
sought to identify the central mediating processes. In particular, we
ship from the John Randolph and Dora Haynes Foundation. We gratefully
acknowledge the contributions of the participating children, teachers, and
investigated the role of depressive symptoms in the relation be-
school administrative personnel. tween neighborhood violence and poor academic outcomes. A
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David number of investigators have hypothesized that the emotional
Schwartz, Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, distress experienced by many children following violence expo-
501 Seely G. Mudd, Los Angeles, California 90089. sure could interfere with academic adjustment at school (e.g.,
163
164 SCHWARTZ AND GORMAN
Jenkins & Bell, 1997; Lorion, 1998; Overstreet, 2000). The symp- (Shields, Cicchetti, & Ryan, 1994). Here, we use the term self-
toms of depression and other forms of internalized distress asso- regulation to refer to basic psychological competencies that allow
ciated with such experiences (e.g., Lynch & Cicchetti, 1998; a child to adaptively modulate emotion, attention, and behavior
Martinez & Richters, 1993; Singer, Anglin, Song, & Lunghofer, despite external challenges (Pope & Bierman, 1999; Shields &
1995) may result in difficulties with intrusive thoughts, loss of Cicchetti, 1998). Not surprisingly, there is consistent evidence
energy, decreased motivation, and impaired concentration, which linking community violence exposure to aggressive behavior, hy-
might be expected to hinder children’s functioning in the class- peractivity, and other significant impairments in regulation of
room (Pynoos & Nader, 1988). behavior and negative affect (Attar, Guerra, & Tolan, 1994;
Mediating pathways of this nature have not been directly exam- Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998; Schwartz & Proctor, 2000).
ined in any existing study of community violence exposure and It seems likely that children who experience problems with
academic functioning. However, similar models have been the behavioral control will have difficulty negotiating the academic
focus of empirical attention in related areas of inquiry. For exam- demands of school. Children who are impulsive, hyperactive, or
ple, Juvonen et al. (2000) and Juvonen, Nishina, and Graham easily distracted will find it hard to stay on task in the classroom
(2001) reported evidence that depressive symptoms, loneliness, and remain engaged in schoolwork over long periods of time (Coie
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
and low self-worth mediate the association between persistent & Krehbiel, 1984). Aggressive or noncompliant behavior might
harassment by peers and negative school outcomes (i.e., low also interfere with a child’s functioning in the classroom. Thus,
GPAs, frequent absences from school). community violence exposure could be linked to academic diffi-
Another critical mediational process may involve disruptive culties through the mediating influence of disruptive behavior
behavior problems. Children who have been exposed to violence in problems.
the community tend to be characterized by intense feelings of Our full theoretical model is presented schematically in Fig-
anger and irritability (Osofsky, 1995). Powerful mood states of this ure 1. As illustrated, we hypothesized that community violence
nature can overwhelm a child’s developing capacities for self- exposure would be negatively associated with academic function-
regulation and exert a disorganizing influence on behavior ing through the two identified mediating mechanisms: depressive
Figure 1. Schematic depiction of hypothesized mediational paths linking community violence exposure to
academic difficulties through the mediation of disruptive behavior and symptoms of depression.
COMMUNITY VIOLENCE EXPOSURE 165
symptoms and disruptive behavior. For conceptual clarity, the Per capita crime rates in this section of Los Angeles county are mod-
direct path between violent victimization and academic function- erate, at least in comparison with other densely populated urban areas of
ing is excluded. Nonetheless, we acknowledge that the pathways in the United States (County of Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department, 1996).
question are complex and may not be fully accounted for by the Nonetheless, gang violence remains an extremely serious problem through-
out the Los Angeles region (Klein, 1995). Moreover, homicide rates in the
hypothesized mediating processes.
adjacent sections of the county increased throughout the period of the study
Although our primary focus was on the link between community
(Los Angeles Police Department, 1999) despite national trends in the
violence exposure and academic difficulties, we also conducted opposite direction (Blumstein & Wallman, 2000).
exploratory analyses examining the role of bullying by peers. In All children in 16 third-, fourth-, and fifth-grade classrooms from the
particular, we sought to determine whether community violence participating school were invited to take part in the project. Of these
exposure and bullying by peers make independent contributions to children, 80% returned positive parental permission and assented to par-
the prediction of academic outcomes. We viewed this as an im- ticipate. However, our analyses did not include 21 children who had either
portant issue for investigation because there is evidence that chil- pervasive developmental delays or serious hearing impairments. The final
dren who are exposed to violence in the community also tend to sample included 237 children (114 boys, 123 girls; mean age of 9.5 years),
emerge as persistent targets of bullying (Schwartz & Proctor, although the actual subsample varied across analyses because of missing
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
values (4 children had at least one missing value). Consistent with the
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Table 1
Percentage of Children Who Endorsed Self-Report Violence Exposure Items
Note. Items from the Community Experiences Questionnaire (Schwartz & Proctor, 2000) are scored on a
4-point scale, with 1 ⫽ never, 2 ⫽ once, 3 ⫽ a few times, and 4 ⫽ lots of times. Factor loadings are based on
a principal components analysis, yielding a single factor solution. Means and standard deviations summarize the
average rating given by the participating children for each item. Percentages are based on participating children
who gave ratings of 2 or higher on the 4-point scale.
15%. Overall, the exposure rates reported by these children were consistent was .80, p ⬍ .01). A summary peer nomination score for aggression was
with past survey research conducted in economically distressed urban calculated from the total number of nominations received by each child
settings (e.g., Bell & Jenkins, 1993; Fitzpatrick & Boldizar, 1993; Kliewer across these items, standardized within class.
et al., 1998; Richters & Martinez, 1993) including large-scale epidemio- Depression. Children completed the Children’s Depression Inventory
logical studies (Boney-McCoy & Finkelhor, 1995; Schwab-Stone et al., (CDI; Kovacs, 1985), a widely used self-report assessment of depressive
1995, 1999). There is some variability across existing investigations, but symptoms. This measure includes 27 items that require children to choose
previous researchers have generally found that between 10% to 20% of one of three sentences describing varying degrees of severity in symptoms.
responding children indicate experiences with severe acts of violence (i.e., However, during the data collection, we excluded an item that assessed
shootings, stabbings, violent muggings), and 30% to 50% of urban children suicidal ideation (see Burbach, Farha, & Thorpe, 1986). In addition, we
report exposure to verbal threats or other less serious incidents (for a dropped two items from analysis that reference children’s perceptions of
review, see Jenkins & Bell, 1997). However, it should be noted that their academic functioning (e.g., “I do badly in subjects I used to be good
children’s self-reports consistently yield higher exposure estimates than in,” “I have to push myself all the time to do my schoolwork”) to eliminate
data obtained from other informants (Ladd & Kochenderfer-Ladd, 2002; potential item overlap with the outcome constructs. A summary depression
Selner-O’Hagan, Kindlon, Buka, Raudenbaush, & Earls, 1998). score (M ⫽ 1.15, SD ⫽ 0.12) was calculated from the mean of the
Disruptive behavior. Teachers completed the Social Behavior Rating remaining 24 items (␣ ⫽ .88).
Scale (Schwartz, 2000; Schwartz, Chang, & Farver, 2001; Schwartz, Bullying by peers. The peer nomination inventory also contained four
Farver, Chang, & Lee-Shim, 2002). This device includes 43 descriptors of items assessing bullying by peers (“kids who get hit or pushed by other
children’s social behavior and adjustment with peers. Teachers rate the kids,” “kids who get bullied or picked on by other kids,” “kids who have
accuracy of each item on a 5-point scale, with points ranging from 1 mean things said about them by other kids,” “kids who get left out of fun
(almost never true for the child) to 5 (almost always true for the child). games or play when other kids are trying to hurt their feelings”; ␣ ⫽ .87).1
Subscales that are relevant to the present study assessed aggressive behav- We included items assessing both overt and relational subtypes of bullying
ior (“starts arguments,” “threatens or bullies other children,” “taunts or (as per Crick & Grotpeter, 1995), although a principal components analysis
teases,” “hits or pushes,” “uses force to obtain other children’s posses- of the items yielded a single-factor solution (accounting for 72% of the
sions”; ␣ ⫽ .91) and hyperactive–impulsive behavior (“impulsive,” “easily total variance, with all factor loadings greater than .80). For later analysis,
distracted,” “difficulties with attention,” “can’t wait turn,” “doesn’t remain a summary bullying by peers score was calculated from the total number of
seated,” “doesn’t play quietly,” “fidgets”; ␣ ⫽ .89). Teacher rating of
aggression (M ⫽ 1.67, SD ⫽ 0.70) and teacher rating of hyperactivity
(M ⫽ 2.27, SD ⫽ 0.78) summary variables were generated from the mean 1
We relied on a peer nomination assessment of bullying by peers in the
rating across each subscale. present investigation. However, as part of our earlier data collection, we
In addition, a peer nomination inventory was group administered to the also obtained information on bully–victim problems using a self-report
children. Children were given a copy of a class roster and asked to questionnaire and a teacher rating scale (Schwartz & Proctor, 2000). The
nominate up to three peers who fit each of 16 descriptors. Included were violent victimization scale of the CEQ was modestly correlated with both
two items assessing aggression (“kids who bully or pick on other kids,” the self-report score for bullying by peers (r ⫽ .28, p ⬍ .01) and the teacher
“kids who hit or push other kids”; the correlation between the two items rating of bullying by peers (r ⫽ .15, p ⬍ .05).
COMMUNITY VIOLENCE EXPOSURE 167
nominations received by each child across these items, standardized within from school records, comparable data was obtained directly from the
class. child’s teacher.
Academic functioning. As part of annual statewide evaluation proce-
dures, children completed the Stanford Achievement Test—Ninth Edition
(SAT–9; Psychological Corporation, 1996). The SAT–9 is a widely used
Results
standardized assessment of children’s academic achievement. We obtained
Overview
children’s scores (proportion correct) on the Reading (M ⫽ 0.54,
SD ⫽ 0.24) and Mathematics (M ⫽ 0.63, SD ⫽ 0.24) subtests of the We used structural equation modeling (SEM) to examine direct
SAT–9 from a review of the school’s records. and indirect relations between violence exposure and academic
Children’s GPAs were also obtained from the school records. We
functioning. These latent variable models were specified in the
assigned numerical scores to letter grades in reading and math using a
5-point scale, ranging from 1 (F) to 5 (A). The correlation between the
Amos statistical package (Arbuckle & Wothke, 1999). We relied
reading and math scores was .65 ( p ⬍ .01). GPA was calculated as the on the diagnostic procedures contained in this program and careful
mean of these two scores (M ⫽ 3.43, SD ⫽ 0.93). examination of model parameters to assess identification and
stability.
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
Table 2
Bivariate Correlations Among All Variables
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Violence exposure
1. Community violence exposure — .20** .21*** .27**** .24**** .36**** ⫺.24**** ⫺.14† ⫺.26****
2. Bullying by peers — .28**** .35**** .38**** .18** ⫺.19** ⫺.07 ⫺.25****
Behavioral and psychological adjustment
3. Teacher-rated aggression — .73**** .56**** .20** ⫺.23**** ⫺.11 ⫺.31****
4. Teacher-rated hyperactivity — .39**** .27**** ⫺.35**** ⫺.14† ⫺.50****
5. Peer-nominated aggression — .07 ⫺.22*** ⫺.14† ⫺.28****
6. Depression — ⫺.24**** ⫺.10 ⫺.32****
Academic functioning
7. SAT–9 Mathematics — .60**** .64****
8. SAT–9 Reading — .49****
9. GPA —
Note. Critical levels are set at .005 to control error rates. SAT–9 ⫽ Stanford Achievement Test—Ninth Edition.
† p ⬍ .05 (marginally significant). ** p ⬍ .005. *** p ⬍ .001. **** p ⬍ .0005.
168 SCHWARTZ AND GORMAN
Table 3
2
Summary of Model Fit Indices We were concerned that the pattern of weak correlations for the SAT–9
Reading score might be an artifact of language differences between ethnic–
Model Figure 2 df 2/df CFI SRMR RMSEA racial groups. However, exploratory analyses were not consistent with this
conclusion. We conducted bivariate analyses for the SAT–9 Reading score
1 2 1.4 4 0.4 1.00 .01 .00 separately by ethnic–racial group. The pattern of findings was quite con-
2 3 94.5* 47 2.0 0.96 .02 .07 sistent across groups, with only modest correlations between the SAT–9
3 94.9* 48 2.0 0.96 .02 .07 Reading score and other variables in the data set. Interestingly, this pattern
4 4 16.9 24 0.7 1.00 .03 .00 held even when we conducted analyses that included only children from
European American backgrounds. Moreover, although children who de-
Note. Unless otherwise noted, chi-square statistics are not significant. See
Kline (1998) for details regarding these fit indices. CFI ⫽ Bentler’s (1990) scribed themselves as European American (M ⫽ 0.63, SD ⫽ 0.26) did have
comparative fit index; SRMR ⫽ standardized root-mean-squared residual; higher SAT–9 Reading scores than children who described themselves as
RMSEA ⫽ root-mean-square residual error of approximation. Hispanic American (M ⫽ 0.48, SD ⫽ 0.23), there were no other significant
* p ⬍ .01. ethnic–racial group differences for the SAT–9 Reading scores.
COMMUNITY VIOLENCE EXPOSURE 169
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Figure 3. Measurement model examining direct and mediated relations between community violence exposure
(CVE) and academic functioning. Standardized path coefficients and factor loadings in boldface are significant
at p ⱕ .05. Correlations between error terms are not illustrated. See text for details regarding model fit. e ⫽ error;
d ⫽ disturbance; CDI ⫽ Children’s Depression Inventory; SAT–9 ⫽ Stanford Achievement Test—Ninth
Edition.
sistent with our predictions. There were significant paths between sure 3 academic functioning direct path constrained to 0 (Model
community violence exposure and each of the mediator variables 3). We then compared the chi-square indices for the reduced model
and significant paths between each of the mediators and the (i.e., Model 3) and the full model (i.e., Model 2). As expected, this
outcome. In contrast, the direct community violence exposure 3 comparison did not produce a significant effect, 2(1, N ⫽ 233)
academic functioning path was reduced to nonsignificance by difference ⫽ 0.4, ns. Thus, the relation between community vio-
inclusion of the mediators. lence exposure and academic functioning appears to occur primar-
As a further test of our mediational hypotheses, we conducted a ily through the mediational pathways.
series of analyses guided by the recommendations of Holmbeck
(1997). According to Holmbeck, comparison of chi-square fit Relations Between Community Violence Exposure and
indices for a full mediational model (i.e., a model including all Academic Functioning With Bullying by Peers Controlled
direct and indirect paths between the predictor and outcome) and
a model with the direct predictor 3 outcome path removed pro- Finally, we conducted an SEM analyses to examine the relation
vide an appropriate test of mediation. If the direct path is not between community violence exposure and academic difficulties,
necessary for model fit (i.e., removal of the direct path does not independent of the prediction associated with bullying by peers.
significantly decrement fit) then the relation between the predictor The specified model (Model 4) included two exogenous predictor
and outcome is presumed to occur through the indirect pathways variables, community violence exposure (indicated as described
(i.e., through the mediators). Accordingly, we respecified the previously) and bullying by peers (indicated by the four peer
model depicted in Figure 3 with the community violence expo- nomination items). The outcome variable was academic function-
170 SCHWARTZ AND GORMAN
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.
Figure 4. Measurement mode with community violence exposure (CVE) and bullying by peers as simultaneous
predictors of academic functioning. Standardized path coefficients and factor loadings in boldface are significant
at p ⱕ .05. See text for details regarding model fit. e ⫽ error; d ⫽ disturbance; SAT–9 ⫽ Stanford Achievement
Test—Ninth Edition.
ing (indicated as described previously). The fit of this model was performance (as indexed by GPAs and standardized achievement
acceptable (see Table 3), and all factor loadings were of at least tests).
moderate magnitude. As depicted in Figure 4, there was a signif- What processes underlie the association between community
icant association between the community violence exposure and violence exposure and academic difficulties? The results of this
bullying by peers latent variables and significant negative paths study suggest that children who report violence exposure in the
from each of the predictor variables to academic functioning. community may be vulnerable to academic difficulties because
Thus, community violence exposure was associated with academic
difficulties even after we statistically controlled bullying by peers.3
3
For exploratory purposes, we also specified a model with bullying by
Discussion peers indicated only by the two overt bullying items (“hit or pushed by
other children,” “picked on or bullied by other children”). Inclusion of the
This investigation attempted to extend the existing research on relational bullying items has the potential to enhance the content validity of
children who live in violent urban neighborhoods by focusing on the peer nomination scale by extending the range or relevant behaviors
the link between community violence exposure and academic assessed. However, overt bullying items have stronger conceptual associ-
functioning at school. Past researchers have reported that commu- ations with the forms of victimization assessed by our community violence
nity violence exposure is associated with disruptive behavior prob- exposure measure. The findings from this modified SEM analysis closely
replicated the model summarized in Figure 4. Overall fit of the model was
lems (Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998), depression or other forms of
strong (CFI ⫽ 1.00, RMSEA ⫽ .00, 2/df ⫽ 0.73, SRMR ⫽ .02).
internalized distress (e.g., Kliewer et al., 1998; Martinez & Rich- Community violence exposure and bullying by peers were significantly
ters, 1993), and social maladjustment with peers (Schwartz & associated (standardized coefficient ⫽ .24, p ⬍ .05). In addition, there were
Proctor, 2000). Our findings add to this growing body of work by significant negative paths to academic functioning from community vio-
demonstrating that there is a relation between children’s self- lence exposure (standardized path coefficient ⫽ –.27, p ⬍ .01) and from
reports of community violence exposure and deficient academic bullying by peers (standardized path coefficient ⫽ –.19, p ⬍ .05).
COMMUNITY VIOLENCE EXPOSURE 171
their functioning at school is hindered by symptoms of depression. and underlying behavioral propensities to the prediction of school-
Like previous investigators (see Osofsky, 1995), we found mod- based outcomes.
erately strong relations between community violence exposure and Careful consideration should also be given to the nature of our
depressive tendencies (e.g., intrusive thoughts, decreased motiva- violence exposure assessment. Like previous investigators (Bell &
tion, low energy). In turn, depressive tendencies were associated Jenkins, 1993; Fitzpatrick & Boldizar, 1993; Kliewer et al., 1998;
with deficient academic performance and at least partially ac- Martinez & Richters, 1993; Osofsky et al., 1993), we relied on
counted for the negative association between violent victimization children’s self-reports of their own exposure to violence in the
and academic functioning. community. Assessment approaches of this nature have been
Violence exposure might also exert a pernicious influence on widely accepted in the literature on urban violence (see Selner-
academic functioning by interfering with children’s emerging ca- O’Hagan et al., 1998) based, perhaps, on the assumption that
pacities for self-regulation and behavioral control. In this study, children have unique access to information about their own expe-
children who reported experiences with violent victimization in the riences (Richters & Martinez, 1993). Nonetheless, a number of
community also tended to be characterized by aggression and researchers have conceptualized self-report questionnaires as indi-
hyperactivity (as indicated by teacher ratings and peer nomina-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
tions). Not surprisingly, disruptive behavior problems were related than objective assessments of experience (for a review, see
to poor academic functioning. Latent variable models suggested Schwarz, 1999). From this perspective, violence exposure inven-
that these associations served a mediating role in the link between tories might be viewed as assessments of children’s cognitive
community violence exposure and poor academic performance. schemata regarding their communities instead of direct measures
Our findings regarding the incremental contributions of bullying of experiences with violence (as we have suggested elsewhere; see
by peers and community violence exposure to the prediction of Schwartz & Proctor, 2000).
academic outcomes are also noteworthy. Like previous researchers Self-report assessments of violence exposure have received a
(Schwartz & Proctor, 2000), we found evidence for a modest degree of validation in past research. For example, children’s
association between these two forms of victimization. Children self-reports of violence exposure, when aggregated within neigh-
who experience violence in the community may be vulnerable to borhoods, correspond systematically with violent crimes rates at
bullying or related social difficulties with school peers as a con-
the community level (Richters & Martinez, 1993). There is also a
sequence of acquired deficits in emotion regulation and social-
moderate degree of agreement between parent and child reports
information processing (Shahinfar, Kupersmidt, & Matza, 2001).
(Kuo, Moher, Raudenbush, & Earls, 2000; Selner-O’Hagan et al.,
There is also conceptual overlap in these constructs, with some
1998). In addition, self-reports demonstrate strong construct va-
similar experiences being assessed by the relevant measures. How-
lidity (Fitzpatrick & Boldizar, 1993; Kliewer et al., 1998; Martinez
ever, in our SEM analyses, bullying by peers and community
& Richters, 1993; Osofsky et al., 1993) and acceptable predictive
violence exposure each had independent negative associations
validity (Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998; Schwab-Stone et al.,
with academic functioning. One potential implication of these
1999). Nonetheless, children tend to report higher levels of expo-
findings is that children who experience victimization in multiple
sure than might be expected on the basis of reports obtained from
contexts (i.e., the community and the school peer group) may be at
adult informants (Selner-O’Hagan et al., 1998). Similar patterns of
particularly high risk for academic difficulties.
Several limitations of the present research should be kept in findings have emerged in related domains of inquiry, with children
mind when evaluating our findings. First, the correlational design showing a possible tendency toward over reporting negative ex-
of the present project does not provide a secure foundation for periences (e.g., research on bully–victim problems in school peer
causal inferences. This is a significant concern because some groups; see Juvonen et al., 2001; Ladd & Kochenderfer-Ladd,
children are likely to be characterized by attributes that predict 2002). The implications of such assessment difficulties for the
both violence exposure and negative educational outcomes (for prediction of educational outcomes are not yet clear. Likewise, we
related comments, see Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998). For exam- cannot be certain that alternative measures of violence exposure
ple, children who have significant deficits in self-regulation (e.g., (i.e., police reports or data obtained from other informants) would
impulsivity, aggression, hyperactivity) will do poorly in school yield a similar pattern of associations with academic functioning
and may also tend to select into environments in which violence difficulties.
exposure is a high probability. Another potential shortcoming of this study is that we did not
The suggestion that particular psychological or behavioral char- attempt to assess children’s exposure to extreme forms of violence
acteristics might be associated with risk for community violence is in contexts other than the community or neighborhood. However,
consistent with emerging sociological perspectives on urban vio- levels of violence exposure may be related across contexts. For
lence. Such conceptualizations emphasize the link between anti- example, there is some evidence that children who have had
social lifestyles (e.g., frequent involvement with deviant peers; see experiences with violence in the community tend to be at risk for
Halliday-Boykins & Graham, 2001) and violence exposure in the exposure to violence in the home (see Margolin & Gordis, 2000).
community. However, children may suffer from adjustment prob- Although these associations do not appear to be strong, the con-
lems following violence exposure even if they are active partici- clusions that can be drawn with specific regard to neighborhood
pants in the larger situation. Moreover, researchers have found that violence and children’s academic functioning might be strength-
community violence exposure can exacerbate existing tendencies ened by more multifaceted assessments (i.e., measures that simul-
toward externalizing behavior (Gorman-Smith & Tolan, 1998). taneously tap violence exposure in the community, home, and
Thus, an important challenge for future educational researchers school peer group). In the meantime, the limited data that are
will be determining the relative contributions of violent exposure available suggest that domestic violence and community violence
172 SCHWARTZ AND GORMAN
make incremental contributions to the prediction of child malad- social status of low-achieving, socially rejected children. Child Devel-
justment (Linares et al., 2001). opment, 55, 1465–1478.
A final series of concerns relates to sample composition. In the County of Los Angeles Sheriff’s Department. (1996). Year in review. Los
Los Angeles region (where this project was conducted), as in other Angeles: Author.
major urban centers of North America, children from ethnic–racial Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and
social–psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710 –722.
minority backgrounds are overrepresented in distressed inner-city
Fitzpatrick, K. M., & Boldizar, J. P. (1993). The prevalence and conse-
neighborhoods (see United Way of Greater Los Angeles, 1999). quences of exposure to violence among African-American youth. Jour-
These children may also experience stressors (i.e., racism, discrim- nal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 32,
ination) that exacerbate the effect of negative life events on aca- 424 – 430.
demic functioning at school. Accordingly, we chose to recruit a Garbarino, J., Dubrow, N., Kostelny, K., & Pardo, C. (1992). Children in
diverse sample with a relatively high proportion of children who danger: Coping with the consequences of community violence. San
were from minority ethnic–racial backgrounds. It is possible that Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
our findings might not replicate in other kinds of samples (i.e., Gorman-Smith, D., & Tolan, P. (1998). The role of exposure to community
samples that are primarily composed of European American chil- violence and developmental problems among inner-city youth. Devel-
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
children and contexts: The longitudinal interplay among child maltreat- Schwab-Stone, M., Chen, C., Greenberger, E., Silver, D., Lichtman, J., &
ment, community violence, and children’s symptomatology. Develop- Voyce, C. (1999). No safe haven: II. The effects of violence exposure on
ment & Psychopathology, 10, 235–257. urban youth. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Margolin, G., & Gordis, E. B. (2000). The effects of family and community Psychiatry, 38, 359 –367.
violence on children. Annual Review of Psychology, 51, 445– 479. Schwartz, D. (2000). Subtypes of aggressors and victims in children’s peer
Martinez, P., & Richters, J. E. (1993). The NIMH community violence groups. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 28, 181–192.
project: II. Children’s distress symptoms associated with violence ex- Schwartz, D., Chang, L., & Farver, J. M. (2001). Correlates of victimiza-
posure. Psychiatry, 56, 22–35. tion in Chinese children’s peer groups. Developmental Psychology, 37,
McClelland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detect- 520 –532.
ing interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114, Schwartz, D., Farver, J. M., Chang, L., & Lee-Shim, Y. (2002). Victim-
376 –390. ization in South Korean children’s peer groups. Journal of Abnormal
Osofsky, J. D. (1995). The effect of exposure to violence on young Child Psychology, 30, 113–125.
children. American Psychologist, 50, 782–788. Schwartz, D., & Proctor, L. J. (2000). Community violence exposure and
Osofsky, J. D., Wewers, S., Hann, D. M., & Fick, A. C. (1993). Chronic children’s social adjustment in the school peer group: The mediating
community violence: What is happening to our children? Psychiatry, 56, roles of emotion regulation and social cognition. Journal of Consulting
This article is intended solely for the personal use of the individual user and is not to be disseminated broadly.
36 – 45.
This document is copyrighted by the American Psychological Association or one of its allied publishers.